Post Your Comment

31 Comments

I read quite a bit and find myself returning to the same books and materials over and over. The highlighting option is a plus because of my behavior :) You can never bookmark enough I say. Plus, I have a few audio books as well that feature will be used. All in all, I think it's perfect for a reader like myself, even for technical docs.Reply

I'm amazed that a review of an eREADER has no mention of the actual reading experience. How does flipping pages compare to Kindles/other devices with dedicated next/previous page buttons? Is it bothersome? Does it misintepret you accidentally brushing the screen? Or are there no issues?

I would imagine that this is a far more pressing concern to just about everyone in the market for one. Reply

I added an extra sentence in the touchscreen section to clarify and to address the potential for accidental page turns (they'll happen, but no more often than you'd expect), but otherwise I thought I was pretty clear: reading on the Kindle Touch is comfortable, and if you're coming from another Kindle you'll have no trouble adapting. I wouldn't say that the touchscreen makes reading BETTER, but the other features you get with the Touch more than justify the extra $20 over the base unit.Reply

It's funny because it seems pretty personal. I wanted a touch primarily so I could zoom easily when viewing pdfs (which it does... OK, not great). My wife used mine for 20 minutes and decided she found the touchscreen got in the way of reading, and bought a Kindle keyboard. Having played around with the Kindle 4, I have to say I do like the page turn buttons as well: it's a real shame they didn't include them on the Touch, but it doesn't for me get in the way of the experience. The Touch works pretty well for me, overall. On the other hand, if you go over to winsupersite and read Paul Thurrott's Touch review, he's absolutely damning. He hated it so much he returned it. It seems like different folks have very different experiences with the Touch. I think it's wise to go to Target or Best Buy and have a play around with one in person before ordering.Reply

Nothing beats Kindle ... That is to much, i really think Nook Simple Touch is better reader. It is less expensive (compared to Kindle without adds), it can be rooted ... and with that said, you can have Kindle and Nook on the same device ...Obviously i'm on the side of the Nook, i would like to hear why people are choosing the Kindle ...Reply

> Obviously i'm on the side of the Nook, i would like to hear why people are choosing the Kindle ...

Perhaps in a DRM free world, the choice would be more difficult. I really wanted a Sony Touch (when I was shopping a year ago), but no one has the content that Amazon has, so I ended up getting the Kindle Keyboard. I have no complaints thus far.Reply

Note: I read somewhere (probably http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2011/10/kindle... that the "Experimental browser" mode for the new e-paper Kindles is limited when using 3G connectivity. Apparently it can only load Wikipedia entries or the Kindle Store when connecting that way. WiFi connections are apparently not hamstrung in the same way.Reply

I use Instapaper, which is great for articles which are straight up text (although the Kindle Touch misfiles them as books and won't give you an index page) but strips all the images. Calibre will pull the Anandtech rss feed and include images, and I've used that for a few articles (benchmarks are no good without graphs). It's kind of a hassle to get set up and working, but worth it for some of the longer articles if you're tired of staring at a screen.You can also get Amazon to convert pdfs and other files into their format by emailing to your Kindle with "CONVERT" in the subject line. The results are pretty variable, but it can be useful.Reply

When Sony released their PR range of E-readers the touchscreen version was less readable due to the touch screen layer. It had, all be it slight, fuzziness that was not present on the cheaper but much sharper button based one. The fact that Amazon has integrated a touch screen without any impact on reading quality is quite impressive, a feat Sony failed to do.Reply

This is what kept me from jumping into a touch screen Kindle. The Sony touch models really didn't look good at all. I still don't think it's worth going from a Kindle 3 to, but it's slightly more tempting knowing that it at least looks comparable.Reply

Well, that is not true. I have PRS-950 and is using the same " infrared touch" technology that Kindle is using now. So, Kindle is kind of year and half behind ... PRS-900 had a touch layer, which was introduced like a two and half years ago ...Reply

This is deprecated news. The Sony readers of the last year or so have used the same technology that the Kindle Touch is now using. The Sony readers are great and I think the Nook Touch which has been out for a while now is a better reader than Kindle's Touch offering for a few reasons including being cheaper (ad free version).Reply

Maybe I missed something, it's entirely possible this is in another review, but where is the comparison to the nook touch I've been looking for? Personally I think I like the nook version better, but I was hopping to get a valid sound opinion (something I can trust anandtech for) on the newest kindle competitors and how they stack up to be sure.Reply

That was exactly what I was looking for, and was excited when I heard mention of the Nook Touch in the summary. But there's nothing: no comparisons of the e-ink screens, the UI, etc.

What I really would like to see is a comparison of the different e-readers, especially the ease with which they can be hacked to do more tablet-y things, and whether that's even a worthwhile endeavor. Reply

I'd love to see a Nook Touch comparison. I'm not likely to dump my Kindle 3 any time soon, but if something happens to it, I'd either be getting a Nook Touch or a Kindle 4; the lack of hardware page turn buttons is a deal-breaker for me on this one.Reply

Already echoed in other posts, but this review really needs to match it up against competitors such as the Nook Simple Touch, something by Kobo, and probably something by Sony. It's like reviewing a video card but only showing benchmarks from that particular card and not the competition. Reply

I wish there was more (any?) info in the review about how the new Kindle handles books or articles that are not text-only.

I assume that most AnandTech readers have a strong interest in technical books and articles. These often include images, diagrams, tables, source code and what not.What is the experience of reading this type of "rich text" materials on the new Kindle? Did it improve at all compared to previous versions?

I've found that f the technical book is in an e-book format (epub, kindle) then it's fine. You lose any colors that would have been there, but it's perfectly legible. If it's only in PDF then you won't be happy. My Nook pulls the text from PDFs fine, but the code samples are interpreted as images, so they're either too small to read or they're placed on a different page from where the text refers to them. Note, this maybe just how the Nook handles PDFs, and might not apply to the Kindle products.

If you do read a lot of graphics-heavy text, then you may be better off with an LCD instead of E-ink.Reply

The inability to read/browse internet over 3G pretty much killed all consideration for buying this model. The only (big) issue I had with last generation Kindle with 3G was navigation. When they announced the touch models back in September, I said, "FINALLY!".

It's not an excellent web browsing experience. It served its purpose as an on the go way to browse various wikis and blogs. AT&T must have put their foot down when it actually became easy to navigate web pages via a touch screen vs. clicking away on the keyboard and using the directional pad to select links.

How can you be disappointed though when you pretty clearly understand the (likely) reason? I'd look at it from the point of view that the Kindle 4's are what one would typically "expect" and the Kindle 3's had this crazy exceptional benefit, where you really were getting something for nothing.

BTW, on a Kindle 4 you can browse all of amazon.com via 3G -- not just their store. Granted, for most people that's little difference, although Amazon does have, e.g., forums of their own some people follow.Reply

One other thing -- most people seem to be predicting the next Kindle Fire will have 3G and various regular-old-data plan options. Knowing Amazon, I think there's a chance these will be halfway sanely priced, e.g., $25 for 5GB/mo or something like that. Definitely worth keeping an eye on...Reply

Not a tablet user, so all I want is an eReader. The least expensive good one is the one I want.

I went with the new Nook Simple Touch on "Black Friday" because they had an in-store sale for $79. With a renew on my Barnes and Noble discount card, it was another $10 off, which made it $69. But really, the main reason I went with the Nook is that the $79 Kindle has advertisements on it. While it's true they don't interfere with actual reading, it still irritates me that they want to force ads down my throat in yet another format. Aren't they making enough money on the eBooks as is?

It is a nice device, very similar to the Kindle Touch. It doesn't have the sound options, or the X-Ray feature. It does have in-store support, including being able to review books while in the stores you might not be able to otherwise. (I actually like that the device encourages me to get out of the house on occasion; you don't have to if you don't want to, but anything that helps get get off my butt is a good thing. :) )

I'm not recommending it over the Kindle necessarily, just saying why I bought it and that the newest one is another option.

Anyone recommending an iPad2 over this device is simply clueless. I should buy something that costs 5+ times as much, is much bigger and heavier (weighs almost 3x as much), and is harder to read in daylight, just so I can do on it what I can already do on my notebook or desktop? Such a person is clearly not a reader, and never took a book to bed.

The Kindle Touch has a battery almost double (if I remember right) that of the base Kindle. For 20 bucks more that alone is worth it IMO. This will still go weeks without a charge for most people, but for avid readers like me devices rated at two months often last less than two weeks, and if you're going away somewhere its just nice to have the better battery. I have a Nook Touch and that's my experience anyways, and that has a battery closer to the Kindle Touch. Reply

Just to inform you all that Amazon Kindle Touch doesn't support screen rotation. If you are gonna read PDFs, it is too difficult to read them comfortably. The old models of kindles had this feature but, unfortunately, this newer one lacks it. Amazon must explicitly inform this fact as it is not mentioned even in device specifications. Thousands of customers suffered it and Amazon's forum itself is full of the complaints regarding this issue. Interestingly the hackers came with a solution to jailbreak the device to address the issue BUT THAT VOIDS YOUR WARRANTY.Reply